 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Elkwoman46
Date: 2011-10-12 21:12
I would like to inquire...
Providing that they are in working order...are all Buffet clarinets a good choice in their perspective categories...beginner, intermediate, advanced, etc. ??? And various price ranges?
I have not seen too much bad sad about these instruments, and am wondering, are they "all" even vintage ones...have they always been considered pretty good in tune, etc.???
Not too many intonation problems, good tone, and all that?
Just wondering.
Thanks so very kindly for your input...
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: sfalexi
Date: 2011-10-13 01:54
I'll say that they tend to have the same tuning tendencies. Every R13, R13 greenline, and R13 prestige I've tried has had a flat thumb and forefinger E and even flatter thumb F. I just expect it now.
Alexi
US Army Japan Band
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2011-10-13 02:51
I wouldn't say all categories. I tried a B11 that was a piece of crap. The Tosca is too bright for my tastes. The Prestige is tolerable but the R13 had reigned supreme for many years for a reason. They are stable, focused horns with a solid sound. Internal pitch can be iffy from horn to horn, you just have to try them out (with a tuner) to decide.
.................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bob Phillips
Date: 2011-10-13 04:34
I advise caution.
Buffets are highly variable in their playability, tone quality and intonation. I've owned some bad ones that my technicians could not resuscitate.
Before buying ANY clarinet, test it thoroughly. If short of confidence, ask for (and/or hire) assistance. Be sure that the horn is in representative playing condition before testing.
Bob Phillips
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SteveG_CT
Date: 2011-10-13 05:24
Hopefully this thread doesn't turn out to be a powder keg. Many players have very strong opinions regarding Buffet.
In any case, I pretty much agree with what has been said thus far regarding the R13 and other current Buffet pro models. They are generally very good but the quality varies from instrument to instrument. It is sometimes said that Buffet has the least consistency of quality among the "big 4".
As far as older Buffet clarinets I don't think the pre-R13 models are anything special. Some are good players but they aren't any better than other professional clarinets from the same era. These days the pre-R13's are selling for inflated prices due to brand association and represent some of the worst values among vintage clarinets in my opinion.
For student clarinets I've never been particularly impressed with the B12. It's decent and priced about where it should be. I think the YCL-250 is a better clarinet but it's also a good bit more expensive.
The Buffet / Evette&Shaeffer intermediate instruments provide some interesting options. Some of the E&S instruments (the Master Model and instruments with a serial number starting with K in particular) were supposedly made from Buffet R13's that were rejected for cosmetic reasons. Occasionally you can find one of these at a good price and they are frequently rather good players. I played an E&S Master Model for a while that was quite nice.
The current Buffet intermediate line is decent but I don't think it represents a good value. The E-11 France sells for the same price as the Yamaha YCL-650 which is a professional model. I've played both and prefer the YCL-650 by a large margin. That's not to say the E-11 France is a bad clarinet because it's not. I just think that it should probably be priced around $200 less than it is now.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Wes
Date: 2011-10-13 05:25
The flat E and F at the top of the bottom register can be easily fixed by undercutting those tone holes, but it would be nice if they did it in the factory.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Jack Kissinger
Date: 2011-10-13 15:18
Oh goodness, the old E&S Master Model urban legend resurfaces. I thought we had laid that to rest here long ago. There are only a very few E&S Master Model clarinets that really are R13s that were rejected at the end of the manufacturing process for minor cosmetic reasons. These have serial numbers that fall in the normal Buffet professional serial number list -- no K-prefix -- presumably because they were rejected after the serial number had been stamped. K-prefix E&S Master Models are not rejected R13s. The E&S was a separate model with a separate design.
I agree with most of Steve's other comments though. (But I might have used the word troll rather than thread in the first sentence. )
Best regards,
jnk
Post Edited (2011-10-13 15:20)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SteveG_CT
Date: 2011-10-13 20:27
Jack Kissinger wrote:
> Oh goodness, the old E&S Master Model urban legend resurfaces.
> I thought we had laid that to rest here long ago. There are
> only a very few E&S Master Model clarinets that really are R13s
> that were rejected at the end of the manufacturing process for
> minor cosmetic reasons. These have serial numbers that fall in
> the normal Buffet professional serial number list -- no
> K-prefix -- presumably because they were rejected after the
> serial number had been stamped. K-prefix E&S Master Models are
> not rejected R13s. The E&S was a separate model with a
> separate design.
>
> I agree with most of Steve's other comments though. (But I
> might have used the word troll rather than thread in the first
> sentence. )
>
> Best regards,
> jnk
>
Fair enough. I hadn't heard that the E&S/R13 connection was more or less debunked. In any case the rumor seems to be pretty pervasive as it is often quoted in Ebay listings and frequently results in higher selling prices (probably why it gets repeated so much). I owned a master model for a coupl of years while in college and remember it being a pretty good player, probably better than most of the E-11's Ive played.
Incidentally, if you agree with most of my comments then how exactly was my post a troll attempt?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Jack Kissinger
Date: 2011-10-13 21:54
"Incidentally, if you agree with most of my comments then how exactly was my post a troll attempt?"
Not your post, the original question. You wrote:
"Hopefully this thread doesn't turn out to be a powder keg...."
As I would have written it:
"Hopefully this [troll] doesn't turn out to be a powder keg...."
Use the search function and you will find more discussion of the E&S MM/rejected R13 claim than you want to read.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Elkwoman46
Date: 2011-10-13 21:59
That is very unkind.
Actually, I spent hours researching on the internet about some Buffets recently. I am sincerely questing for answers in my searches.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SteveG_CT
Date: 2011-10-13 22:01
Jack Kissinger wrote:
> Not your post, the original question.
I see. Sorry for the misunderstanding.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarinetist04
Date: 2011-10-14 03:11
What's unkind? Honesty?
You asked if they were good models in their respective categories. The answer will depend on who you ask! You've asked a question that will evoke the strongest of emotions among clarinetists, from the best to the novices. There are wide quality differences within each model. For example, I went testing R-13s earlier this year, had about 10 of them and they ranged everywhere from wonderful out-of-the-box to disgraceful in the sense of I can't believe the instrument passed Buffet's QC measures. But caveat emptor - it's a free market.
That inconsistency is not unique to Buffet. All exhibit some variation but to what degree is a matter of debate more than fact, it would seem. Never buy an instrument without testing it - if you keep that advice in mind, your attempt to compare Buffet's quality/cost/balance/etc. to the other manufacturer's is moot.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarnibass
Date: 2011-10-14 05:01
For the original question, whenever I've tried a bunch of Buffet clarinets of the same model they played very similar. Maybe some were better than others but they had pretty much the same tendencies. This is for new ones of the same model at stores, trade shows, etc.
Whenever I try a single Buffet clarinet that belongs to a player, it is often significantly different from others of the same model I've tried at a different time. Some tendencies are similar but still, there are significant differences, a lot more than the similar group of clarinets, of the same model.
>> For student clarinets I've never been particularly impressed with the B12. It's decent and priced about where it should be. I think the YCL-250 is a better clarinet but it's also a good bit more expensive. <<
Strange how prices reverse in different parts of the world... the B12 is more expensive here, with occasional discounts on both that put them at approx the same price.
>> That's not to say the E-11 France is a bad clarinet because it's not. I just think that it should probably be priced around $200 less than it is now. <<
I had the chance to try a bunch of them a few times and they played pretty nicely. I recently checked a new one more thoroughly and found so many problems, including:
- Falling corks and felts.
- Corks and felts glued poorly i.e. half glued to the key, not where they should be.
- Materials that create a spongy feel to the keys.
- Huge double action for left hand F/C lever.
- Several ruined pads after just a few months (torn skin or felt falling off compeltely).
- Awful binding of all the tenons. Not the "usual" wood swelling and temp/humidity changing between areas, but much worse, actualy the worst I've seen. Tenon diameters were much bigger than socket diameters. Looked like a major flaw missed in QC since there was no way anyone ever assembled those clarinet tenons all the way.
- Much worse post mounting system than available on significantly cheaper models.
- etc.
Although usually clarinet prices are significantly higher here, I just saw the E11 France sells for almost $1,500 at WW&BW, excluding sales tax. It is now selling for about $1,200 here, including the mendatory 16% VAT. But that's from the same store the one I mentioned above came from...
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2011-10-14 09:39
The "final prep" on many new clarinets is not great, that is, regarding pads, corks, spring tensions. THIS is the reason why (at least in the '80s) everyone of any ilk in the Chicago area went to Brannen to overhaul their brand new Buffets.
Recently I was almost brought to tears by the quality of the Yamaha pro horns 'out of the box.' They may be the exception. And I'm not just picking on Buffet. My new Wurlitzers had corks glued OVER the top of adjustment screws...........stupid.
.................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SteveG_CT
Date: 2011-10-14 13:37
clarnibass wrote:
> Strange how prices reverse in different parts of the world...
It is strange for there to be so much of a difference in prices. There was a thread a little while ago where a player from the UK was asking for advice while trying to decide between the E-11 and the YCL-450. I suggested she look at the YCL-650 since they were priced about the same as the E-11 here in the US. In the UK however the E-11's sell for significantly less (~$1260 including VAT) than in they do in the US (~$1500) so they are priced alongside Yamaha's intermediate instruments there.
I guess Buffet has decided that they can charge pretty much whatever they want in the US.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Elkwoman46
Date: 2011-10-14 13:53
Okay, I see by the comments that I did open up a can of opinions. I am sorry about that.
I actually won an auction for an old Buffet Evette and seems like from all the research I did (as well for that), it is a type of probably non-German made, by Malerne possibly from (guessing) the 1960's??? And strangely, I will actually be able to help perhaps with information when I get it, because I saw the mention of this particular serial number that starts with a "C"XXXXX particularly mysterious. I did see that these are supposed to be wood, but we will see...grin.
Hence, my question about all this and actually, my general question because per all my searching, I saw that basically the review of Buffet was tremendous, but it seems now looking at this topic I opened up, brings out another side to this instrument, especially about the pads. Perhaps, the pad story is ever evolving because inventors are probably trying new products all the time, working to find the best, but along with that comes the flops as well, and throw in all the manual labor and heating of adhesives and I am sure one has quite the challenge on hand.
Perhaps there is a quest to make pads durable, bug resistant, leak proof, perfectly seated, and all that.
I remember long ago as a teenager, new fabrics were coming out that had stretch. One could only guess how a bathing suit would turn out, but it was only later that really stretchy fabrics came out, and could beat the odds of fitting better. I would venture to say in this current time of revolutionary materials, the pads might be one of them with the adhesives as well. The quest and inventions are on...
Perhaps a lot of this really does come down to the cultures and people in business. Sony made an aperture grill for the picture tube TV's that cost well over $100. RCA had their version that was worth about $5.00. (I saw the two.) Both worked great, but Sony at the time was always seeking for the very best and innovations as well. It was the attitude. Of course, we all remember the video tapes...and it was a mystery to all, why the Sony Beta tapes did not make it, but the VHS tapes did. The Beta tapes were smaller but was quite a bit better in quality, yet people wanted the "bigger" tape: it was something in the mind that said it was "more", but it was not.
In the same way, I think a lot of this reflects for some companies to have the quest to be the best and better, while others may just stick with what works and not change. I kind of perceive this is what we have here...innovators seeking better materials at a time when new materials are coming forth, even now.
I wonder if there has been an exploration of the quality of these pads and why they seem to come up in conversation a lot...are these pads new to the world, or just keep using what is not working? I wonder.
Or are we talking about workmanship more, than materials used?
Just thinking out loud. Grin. And would not it be grand to see pads that never have to be replaced, impervious to anything? Always working, always perfect, water and mildew and bug resistant, just never falling apart?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: SteveG_CT
Date: 2011-10-14 14:21
Elkwoman46 wrote:
> Okay, I see by the comments that I did open up a can of
> opinions.
Unfortunately your original question was one of what I consider to be the holy trinity of clarinetist arguments about equipment.
Probably the three questions most likely to start arguments in my opinion are:
1. Are Buffet clarinets really better?
2. Are small bores really better than large bores?
3. Is wood really better than other materials?
Obviously there are a lot of variations on these, but all of them are questions that will elicit strong opinions from both sides.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Elkwoman46
Date: 2011-10-14 14:26
I see, I hit on the taboo question and did not even know it.
Labeled as troll...and marked for good.
Is there a way to redeem myself?
1. Are Yamaha clarinets any better?
LOL LOL LOL
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bob Phillips
Date: 2011-10-14 15:53
take a moment and think of all the ways a clarinet can be screwed up in the manufacturing process:
Hole location wrong
Wall thickness varied at tone hole
Tone hole undercut to wrong depth
Bore reamer not run to proper depth
Flaw in the material not detected
Really rasty piece of wood
Crossed grain between, say, the upper and lower joint
Tone hole rim skewed
Tone hole seat not flat
Mechanism misaligned
Flawed pivots
Crooked Pad
Poorly shimmed (cork) keywork
Key stops too thick or thin
Pads not opening enough or too much
Random flaw in pad(s)
Wood warped after machining
Spring preloads improperly adjusted
Spring stiffness wrong.
Many of these potential manufacturing errors will affect the instrument. For example, the small air column in a tone hole depends upon the distance between the pad/finger seat and the bottom of the tone hole in the bore or to where the undercut ends on the bottom of the chimney. The inertia of that little column of air will slightly flatten the associated note and those above it. The ideal length makes the instrument play in tune, and a "miss" in the manufacturing would harm the instrument. A good technician might be able to recognize the problem, identify the cause and hand cut (or fill) the tone hole to improve the instrument.
The quality control game is to know how much error can be tolerated and be certain that no instrument goes leaves the factory with a problem.
One way to do that is to "Brannenize" everything you build so that the customer doesn't have to deal with it --the horn plays perfectly right out of the box. This takes skilled set-up technicians who have the authority, knowledge, tools and time to "fix up" every instrument. In the videos of the Buffet factory, the installation of the keywork (for example) is shown, and we see the clarinets being played. We don't see keys being taken off and tone holes re-reamed.
The other, modern way is to adjust the manufacturing process so that nothing gets built or assembled with enough error to matter. This is the 6-sigma process that Deming took to post war Japan. It works by first knowing how badly things can get before they become problems and by then assuring that it is very unlikely that any important thing will ever get that bad. That way, the end-of-the-line "Brannenizing" is not needed. I imagine that something like that is how Yamaha runs their woodwind manufacturing lines.
Bob Phillips
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
